Following the latest Webinar, where total overhaul of pricing was mentioned, I feel eager to give my two cents I would like to suggest some criteria for building a good pricing model, without suggesting a specific model itself. If Webflow find these criteria useful, they could apply them as a checklist to their own ideas.
pricing should allow client ownership and designer access without any extra cost - well, this is the biggest problem I myself experience with the current pricing of Webflow. Currently the whole pricing model is conceived in a way as if all Webflow users are designers and this creates a lot of confusion. What if I am just a user who wants one single web site with advanced features, why should I be paying for 20 private projects on the Personal plan? And then, what if I am a designer who wants to build a site for a client and give the client full ownership and access to that site (wchich is just logical)? Currently this is possible only with the collaborator feature on the more expensive plans. This is just insane. My suggestion is that every single site goes with one additional user access covered in the price, so that designer and client could both access the site. (This should be available regardless of the CMS collaborators feature. Some clients simply do not need a dynamic site and others are confident to tinker with the designer mode. Still others may just insist to have full control over their site no matter if they are skilled to edit it or not);
pricing should not impede organic advertising effect - I have raised this before (forum.webflow.com/t/minify-css-should-not-be-charged-separately/11057) - for instance any feature which increases the site performance in terms of speed should be covered by all plans, instead of being optional. Why is this important? Because fast sites are a great for demonstrating the power of the platform. Imagine me trying to convince a friend to consider Webflow and having to explain that the site X could have been faster if I paid for this or that feature, but since I have not, it is not at its fastest... The demo effect is ruined. Same holds true for having Webflow in the classroom. Webflow is just great for teaching kids how to make sites and this is the biggest free advertising you could possibly think of. So then, why not have special educational access accounts for teachers to use in the classroom? With easy password access, full functionality access, etc.
there should be a limited free version for new customer acquistion purposes - currently available with the Starter plan and implemented quite well as a whole;
pricing should be easy to compare a Webflow site with a Wordpress site - this needs no special explanation, Wordpress is the king on this market and if you want to make money, you need to outplace it. In order to outplace it, you should make it easy for consumers to compare Webflow against Wordpress;
niche features should be optional and charged separately - this concerns the upcoming plug-ins marketplace. Features which are essential should be covered in all pricing plans (e.g. site search). Features which are very specific should be optional, that is, available as plug-ins. My stance is that plug-ins should be available only and solely from Webflow, instead of being available from a marketplace where different developers compete with their own plug-in creations (more on this: forum.webflow.com/t/future-plug-in-architecture/29645/9)
pricing should allow flexibility - e.g. forum.webflow.com/t/team-plans-pay-per-feature-possibility-to-edit-different-web-sites-of-the-same-account-simultaneously/17350
pricing should allow a user to affect the development roadmap - what if, let's say 2% of the yearly spending of a user were deducted to a special "investing fund", available for the user to invest them into a roadmap item of his/ her choice?